Actually there is but you and the other Muslim apologists desperately want to deny it:
Your “evidence” is one blogger’s speculation. A blogger who confesses he doesn’t have evidence for his speculation.
Here is what the blogger wrote:
Last year I wrote about Muslim dog poisoning in Spain. Has it now reached Britain?
[The blogger then links to the same Telegraph article posted above.]
We don’t know this was Muslims. But West Yorkshire is one of the most heavily Muslim-colonised parts of Britain. That’s where Bradford is, for example. Also the fact that pork was used each time is very curious. Muslims are not prohibited from handling pork, only eating it. And “pork-eaters” is one of their favourite insults for infidels. In these incidents, the pork element could provide both an extra sadistic twist and a kind of justification; as the Muslim would see it, the dog would have died because it made the immoral choice of eating pork and therefore was the author of its own demise.
Be honest. You don’t have evidence. You have speculation. Liberals believe speculation is evidence.
No evidence bar one site speculating (who couldnt find Bradford on a map).
And just because I dont think Muslims commit every last crime in Britain doesnt make me an apologist. I am British and I know Britain better than you ever will.